Quality of meta-analyses of non-opioid, pharmacological, perioperative interventions for chronic postsurgical pain: a systematic review

BackgroundIn an attempt to aggregate observations from clinical trials, several meta-analyses have been published examining the effectiveness of systemic, non-opioid, pharmacological interventions to reduce the incidence of chronic postsurgical pain.ObjectiveTo inform the design and reporting of future studies, the purpose of our study was to examine the quality of these meta-analyses.Evidence reviewWe conducted an electronic literature search in Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Published meta-analyses, from the years 2010 to 2020, examining the effect of perioperative, systemic, non-opioid pharmacological treatments on the incidence of chronic postsurgical pain in adult patients were identified. Data extraction focused on methodological details. Meta-analysis quality was assessed using the A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) critical appraisal tool.FindingsOur search yielded 17 published studies conducting 58 meta-analyses for gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin), ketamine, lidocaine, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and mexiletine. According to AMSTAR 2, 88.2% of studies (or 15/17) were low or critically low in quality. The most common critical element missing was an analysis of publication bias. Trends indicated an improvement in quality over time and association with journal impact factor.ConclusionsWith few individual trials adequately powered to detect treatment effects, meta-analyses play a crucial role in informing the perioperative management of chronic postsurgical pain. In light of this inherent value and despite a number of attempts, high-quality meta-analyses are still needed.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021230941.

Chronic Postsurgical Pain After Minimally Invasive Adrenalectomy: Prevalence and Impact on Quality of Life

Background. Minimally invasive adrenalectomy is the standard of care for small adrenal tumours. Both the transperitoneal lateral approach and posterior retroperitoneal approach are widely used and have been proven to be safe and effective. However, the prevalence of chronic postsurgical pain has not been specifically investigated in previous studies. The primary goal of this study was to identify the prevalence of chronic postsurgical pain after minimally invasive adrenalectomy. Methods. A cross-sectional study was performed among all consecutive patients who had undergone minimally invasive adrenalectomy in a single university medical centre. The primary outcome was the prevalence of chronic postsurgical pain. Secondary outcomes were the prevalence of localized hypoesthesia, risk factors for the development of chronic postsurgical pain, and the Health-Related Quality of Life. Three questionnaires were used to measure the prevalence and severity of chronic postsurgical pain, hypoesthesia, and Health-Related Quality of Life. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine risk factors for development of chronic postsurgical pain. Results. Six hundred two patients underwent minimally invasive adrenalectomy between January 2007 and September 2019, of whom 328 signed informed consent. The prevalence of chronic postsurgical pain was 14.9%. Young age was a significant predictor for developing chronic postsurgical pain. The prevalence of localized hypoesthesia was 15.2%. In patients with chronic postsurgical pain, Health-Related Quality of Life was significantly lower, compared to patients without pain. Conclusions. The prevalence of chronic postsurgical pain following minimally invasive adrenalectomy is considerable. Furthermore, the presence of chronic postsurgical pain was correlated with a significant and clinically relevant lower Health-Related Quality of Life. These findings should be included in the preoperative counselling of the patient. In the absence of evidence for effective treatment in established chronic pain, prevention should be the key strategy and topic of future research.

Prediction of chronic postsurgical pain in adults: a protocol for multivariable prediction model development

IntroductionChronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) is a condition that affects an estimated 10%–50% of adults, depending on the surgical procedure. CPSP often interferes with activities of daily living and may have a negative impact on quality of life, emotional and physical well-being. Clinical prediction models can help clinicians target preventive strategies towards patients at high-risk of CPSP. Therefore, the objective of this study is to develop a clinically applicable and generalisable prediction model for CPSP in adults.Methods and analysisThis research will be a prospective single-centre observational cohort study in Denmark spanning approximately 1 year or until a predefined number of patients are recruited (n=1526). Adult patients aged 18 years and older scheduled to undergo surgery will be recruited at Aarhus University Hospital. The primary outcome is CPSP 3 months after surgery defined as average pain intensity at rest or on movement ≥3 on numerical rating scale (NRS) within the past week, and/or average pain interference ≥3 on NRS among any of seven short-form Brief Pain Inventory items in the past week (general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work (including housework), relations with other people, sleep and enjoyment of life). Logistic regression will be used to conduct multivariate analysis. Predictive model performance will be evaluated by discrimination, calibration and model classification.Ethics and disseminationThis research has been approved by Central Region Denmark and will be conducted in accordance with the Danish Data Protection Act and Declaration of Helsinki. Study findings will be disseminated through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publication. A CPSP risk calculator (CPSP-RC) will be developed based on predictors retained in the final models. The CPSP-RC will be made available online and as a mobile application to be easily accessible for clinical use and future research including validation and clinical impact assessments.Trial registration numberNCT04866147.